Pure win: Array.from and Array.of
brendan at mozilla.com
Sun Jul 10 10:18:06 PDT 2011
On Jul 10, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Dmitry A. Soshnikov wrote:
> On 10.07.2011 20:36, Brendan Eich wrote:
>> So the goal of Array.of is to provide a constructor that, unlike Array, does not have that insane special case for Array(42), which presets length (and hints to implementations to preallocate) but leaves holes in [0, length).
> I still don't see how it will help in manual enumeration of the same items which may be directly passed to brackets of array initialiser. We enumerate (by hands) items here, right? -- Array.of(1, 2, 3). And we enumerate items here (by hands also) -- [1, 2, 3]. The difference is that the second case syntactically more elegant and sugared and also doesn't require non-needed function activation with allocating call-stack frame, etc.
That's all true, but beside the point. The use-case is when you can't write a literal, because you are passing a function-that-constructs as a funarg, and the eventual caller may pass only one number arg, or several args. In that case, Array will not do the right thing in the one-number-arg case.
That's the reason for Array.of.
More information about the es-discuss